Share this story

On Thursday, the US Department of Justice (DOJ) unsealed a secret March indictment charging Martin Winterkorn, former Volkswagen CEO, with conspiracy to defraud the US government and customers, wire fraud, and conspiracy to violate the Clean Air Act.

Further Reading

The charges stem from the VW Group diesel emissions scandal that broke in 2015. The company already pleaded guilty to various related charges in US federal court, and it has paid out billions of dollars in fines and buybacks to former customers.

The emissions scandal arose when Audi, VW, and Porsche diesel models were discovered to contain illegal software that suppressed the emissions control system when the driver was on the road. If the car was being tested in a lab, however, sensors would tell the car to keep the emissions control system engaged. The result was that VW Group’s so-called “clean diesel” vehicles were actually emitting nitrogen oxide (NOx) far in excess of the legal limit.

This latest indictment changes that. Winterkorn, 70, has been named as a co-conspirator along with five other men who were named in an earlier federal indictment along with Oliver Schmidt, a former Volkswagen executive. Schmidt was in charge of emissions compliance for Volkswagen cars in the US, and he was arrested while on vacation in Miami in 2016. The executive was sentenced to seven years and a $400,000 criminal penalty in December.

The indictment unsealed today says that around March 2014, Winterkorn learned of a study taking place at West Virginia University’s Center for Alternative Fuels, Engines, and Emissions that showed that VW diesel vehicles were giving off emissions beyond legal limits.

In May, a VW Executive sent a memo to Winterkorn explaining the situation, which stated, “a thorough explanation for the dramatic increase in NOx emissions cannot be given to the authorities.” The memo predicted that the US would open an investigation into the discrepancy.

When such an investigation did open up, the indictment charges that Winterkorn and other executives “pursued a strategy of concealing the defeat device in responding to questions from US regulators, while appearing to cooperate.”

In July 2015, when the US threatened not to re-certify Volkswagen diesels because their emissions numbers were so off, Winterkorn asked his employees for a briefing on the situation. A PowerPoint presentation was allegedly created, detailing exactly how VW was deceiving regulators, “including precisely what information had been disclosed to US regulators and what information had not yet been disclosed.”

The indictment charges that Winterkorn then instructed Schmidt and another VW employee to continue to deceive US regulators at a follow-up meeting in August, “using excuses such as ‘irregularities’ and ‘abnormalities’ for the discrepancy.”

The five men that were indicted with Schmidt and mentioned again in this latest indictment of Winterkorn have not been arrested. All men are German citizens and are believed to be in Germany.

This makes a strong statement. It may not amount to much more depending on extradition, but executives worldwide are no doubt taking note. It's amazing to me that they thought such directives would not be found in discovery. Perhaps he never thought it (legal proceedings) would get that far.

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

Well most of those bankers were Americans with heavy donations to the political establishment. This guy? I bet he hasn't donated more than chump change! Of course that won't buy him protection.

He is a German citizen, it would be illegal for him to donate to US political elections/candidates.

I think that it is interesting that the grand jury is in Detroit. I'm not saying that people who live in the motor city might have a bias against a competitor from another country. It's just interesting to me.

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

Well most of those bankers were Americans with heavy donations to the political establishment. This guy? I bet he hasn't donated more than chump change! Of course that won't buy him protection.

He is a German citizen, it would be illegal for him to donate to US political elections/candidates.

I think that it is interesting that the grand jury is in Detroit. I'm not saying that people who live in the motor city might have a bias against a competitor from another country. It's just interesting to me.

And of course rich men with power never do anything illegal....oh wait....

Does it even matter? I mean, unless he decides to do something stupid like vacation here.

Well he will lose his high paying job at VW and have to suffer through the waning years of his life living within the limited means he has accrued so far..... Well that and the likely 60 million euros he will get from the company he just shafted....

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

Well most of those bankers were Americans with heavy donations to the political establishment. This guy? I bet he hasn't donated more than chump change! Of course that won't buy him protection.

He is a German citizen, it would be illegal for him to donate to US political elections/candidates.

I think that it is interesting that the grand jury is in Detroit. I'm not saying that people who live in the motor city might have a bias against a competitor from another country. It's just interesting to me.

It's both technically correct that he can't personally donate to US political causes, and also utterly irrelevant because I'm sure Volkswagen USA both can and does make significant political donations. Just not as much as the banks I'm betting - or not the right politicians that affect these prosecutions.

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

It's time for this lazy meme to die, and for lazy posters to stop bringing in up every time someone is convicted of a crime.

The DOJ tried a banker based on the 2008 meltdown. He was acquitted by the jury. The problem with criminal trials is that mismanagement isn't a crime. No matter how much you might want it to be.

Meanwhile, this case has a *plenty* of evidence of criminal activity, including the memos discussed in the article.

Tried a banker... how many bankers were involved? How much time and effort was put forth to prove the cases? I'm calling bullshit on your claim. I am quite sure that if the DOJ or the State of NY had dug even a little bit they could have arrested 100's perhaps thousands and convicted dozens. Packaging toxic assets as triple A bonds is fraud, pure and simple.

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

It's time for this lazy meme to die, and for lazy posters to stop bringing in up every time someone is convicted of a crime.

The DOJ tried a banker based on the 2008 meltdown. He was acquitted by the jury. The problem with criminal trials is that mismanagement isn't a crime. No matter how much you might want it to be.

Meanwhile, this case has a *plenty* of evidence of criminal activity, including the memos discussed in the article.

Bullshit. Tried *one* banker? There were at least a dozen Investment Banks involved, and last I checked, breaching your fiduciary duty to investors, defrauding those same investors, conspiring to defraud other investment banks - all of these are all within the purview of the SEC to prosecute.

You want to know what the actual problem is? The SEC was just as complicit in the entire clusterfuck and they no doubt know that their own failings would be bared for the world to see if they engaged in any serious legal action against the bankers or banks involved.

Does it even matter? I mean, unless he decides to do something stupid like vacation here.

It is conceivable that he could travel to another country, and that they would cooperate with extraditing him to us. This is how we get Russian criminals. Since Russia refuses to extradite, we catch them vacationing in Thailand or whatnot.

We're probably a bit less likely to do that here, since we have good diplomatic relations with Germany, and might not want to jeopardize that. Still a possibility though.

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

It's time for this lazy meme to die, and for lazy posters to stop bringing in up every time someone is convicted of a crime.

The DOJ tried a banker based on the 2008 meltdown. He was acquitted by the jury. The problem with criminal trials is that mismanagement isn't a crime. No matter how much you might want it to be.

Meanwhile, this case has a *plenty* of evidence of criminal activity, including the memos discussed in the article.

Bullshit. Tried *one* banker? There were at least a dozen Investment Banks involved, and last I checked, breaching your fiduciary duty to investors, defrauding those same investors, conspiring to defraud other investment banks - all of these are all within the purview of the SEC to prosecute.

You want to know what the actual problem is? The SEC was just as complicit in the entire clusterfuck and they no doubt know that their own failings would be bared for the world to see if they engaged in any serious legal action against the bankers or banks involved.

I think that the worries were less about exposure of their own failings, and more about receipts and digital photos of the hookers and blow.

Wow, this is some pleasantly good news. I'm also legitimately surprised due to the Trump administration being in charge. If anything, I would not be shocked in the slightest if they gave him a yuge award, just the best, because he's cut from the same fraudulent lying cloth, you won't believe it.

Tried a banker... how many bankers were involved? How much time and effort was put forth to prove the cases? I'm calling bullshit on your claim. I am quite sure that if the DOJ or the State of NY had dug even a little bit they could have arrested 100's perhaps thousands and convicted dozens. Packaging toxic assets as triple A bonds is fraud, pure and simple.

While some bankers almost certainly did break the law, your last statement is wrong.

Packaging toxic assets into triple A CDOs wasn't pure or simply anything. It wasn't a simple fraud because the CDO buyers knew that they were getting junky mortgages in the pool. The ratings themselves were supplied by rating agencies who trusted the financial maths, in widespread use at that time, which led to the expectation that the senior tranches would be secure even if the constituent loans were dodgy.

It would be a lot easier to bring a negligence case than a fraud case, and even that would be tough.

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

It's time for this lazy meme to die, and for lazy posters to stop bringing in up every time someone is convicted of a crime.

The DOJ tried a banker based on the 2008 meltdown. He was acquitted by the jury. The problem with criminal trials is that mismanagement isn't a crime. No matter how much you might want it to be.

Meanwhile, this case has a *plenty* of evidence of criminal activity, including the memos discussed in the article.

Bullshit. Tried *one* banker? There were at least a dozen Investment Banks involved, and last I checked, breaching your fiduciary duty to investors, defrauding those same investors, conspiring to defraud other investment banks - all of these are all within the purview of the SEC to prosecute.

The SEC isn't the only regulator in the world. Other regulators have found it equally impossible to bring charges over the events of 2007, because most of what you would naively expect to be criminal - isn't.

The UK is currently prosecuting 4 very senior Barclays bankers for events back then, but it's not for causing the crisis. It's related to the money from Qatar that Barclays used to weather the storm - the prosecutors believe they can link it to a loan that Barclays made to Qatar at the same time.

That's the key point - you actually need a case, specific evidence of a specific crime. It's much harder to do regarding the crisis than people realize. It's clearly very easy to do with VW.

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

Because most of them are American and most of them have passed through the revolving doors of power. It wouldn't look good to the markets if an ex-Goldman, ex-Treasury official got sent down for torching the global economy.

If you want to read (and despair) about the interlinked chains of financial and political power, read Yanis Varoufakis' Adults In The Room, his account of his stint as Greek finance minister and the negotiations with the troika on keeping Greece afloat. These bankstas protect each other. Elected politicians can't touch them because they keep the circle-jerk political economy going even when neoliberal policies of austerity and deregulation threaten to bring the house down.

Any medical journals cited? I see "Environmental Research Letters" surely we must not doubt their unbiased research. I also don't see why trucks get a free pass...they spew their particulates free from frivolous lawsuits....I'm guessing more pollutants than the 10 or 15 VW diesels on the roads of the US.

I'm not sure that that's actually a great argument to be honest. What about all those older cars on the roads which meet nowhere near as stringent emissions standards? By the same logic those are killing far more - and it's obviously not possible to trace specific deaths back to the emissions from specific cars - it's the aggregate emissions which matter. And so then the question would be - why is VW responsible for these deaths, and not the fault of US politicians (or the EPA), for not instituting more stringent standards for all other vehicles?

Wow, and they haven't touched a single banker from 2008 meltdown yet!!

You presume this guy's going to actually be touched. This is an American indictment against a German national. Fighting extradition might end up seeing him die a calm and natural death in his own bed before it's settled.

Unless he's pissed off the other German 1%ers, he's got a long way to go before anyone sees him in an American courtroom, let alone convicted of anything.

I'm not sure that that's actually a great argument to be honest. What about all those older cars on the roads which meet nowhere near as stringent emissions standards? By the same logic those are killing far more.

I'm not sure that that's actually a great argument to be honest. What about all those older cars on the roads which meet nowhere near as stringent emissions standards? By the same logic those are killing far more.

???

Didn't Obama do his best to buy-back those cars?

You okay bro?

He did - my question is more theoretical. For example, US lawmakers could pass a law that says: "All cars which do not meet modern emissions standards are forbidden from being driven on the roads."

That would be draconian, impractical, and impossible to pass any level of Congress.

And yet their failure to do so likely makes up for a far greater amount of emissions and particulate matter in the air over the contiguous US than VW's actions in this case.

Ultimately I'm just pointing out that emissions are fungible. You can't trace emissions from one car to any particular harm. VW's actions DID cause harm, no doubt about it, but the same logic means that so did the actions or inaction of every government, agency, car-maker which could lower emissions but didn't.

Edit: to be clear - I'm not defending VW and saying they're not responsible. But I *do* object to this knee-jerk vilification of VW in the sense "Omg they're actively killing people!" They're not - or if they are, they're doing it in the same way as literally the entire US government, and every other (non-solely EV) carmaker.